b=22456 Remove files for unsupported kernels

[fs/lustre-release.git] / lustre / kernel_patches / patches / jbd-check-for-unmapped-buffer.patch

diff --git a/lustre/kernel_patches/patches/jbd-check-for-unmapped-buffer.patch b/lustre/kernel_patches/patches/jbd-check-for-unmapped-buffer.patch
deleted file mode 100644 (file)
index 0127ef0..0000000
--- a/lustre/kernel_patches/patches/jbd-check-for-unmapped-buffer.patch
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,91 +0,0 @@
-Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2006 15:40:48 -0500
-From: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@redhat.com>
-Subject: [PATCH RHEL5] handle races w/ truncate in journal_dirty_data()
-
-This is for BZ 209647 <https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=209647>: ext3/jbd panic
-
-This patch is now in -mm.
-
-When running several fsx's and other filesystem stress tests, we found
-cases where an unmapped buffer was still being sent to submit_bh by the
-ext3 dirty data journaling code.
-
-I saw this happen in two ways, both related to another thread doing a
-truncate which would unmap the buffer in question.
-
-Either we would get into journal_dirty_data with a bh which was already
-unmapped (although journal_dirty_data_fn had checked for this earlier, the
-state was not locked at that point), or it would get unmapped in the middle
-of journal_dirty_data when we dropped locks to call sync_dirty_buffer.
-
-By re-checking for mapped state after we've acquired the bh state lock, we
-should avoid these races.  If we find a buffer which is no longer mapped,
-we essentially ignore it, because journal_unmap_buffer has already decided
-that this buffer can go away.
-
-I've also added tracepoints in these two cases, and made a couple other
-tracepoint changes that I found useful in debugging this.
-
-Signed-off-by: Eric Sandeen <esandeen@redhat.com>
-Cc: <linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org>
-Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
----
-
- fs/jbd/transaction.c |   15 ++++++++++++++-
- 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
-
-Index: linux-2.6.18-1.2732.el5/fs/jbd/transaction.c
-===================================================================
---- linux-2.6.18-1.2732.el5.orig/fs/jbd/transaction.c
-+++ linux-2.6.18-1.2732.el5/fs/jbd/transaction.c
-@@ -967,6 +967,13 @@ int journal_dirty_data(handle_t *handle,
-        */
-       jbd_lock_bh_state(bh);
-       spin_lock(&journal->j_list_lock);
-+
-+      /* Now that we have bh_state locked, are we really still mapped? */
-+      if (!buffer_mapped(bh)) {
-+              JBUFFER_TRACE(jh, "unmapped buffer, bailing out");
-+              goto no_journal;
-+      }
-+
-       if (jh->b_transaction) {
-               JBUFFER_TRACE(jh, "has transaction");
-               if (jh->b_transaction != handle->h_transaction) {
-@@ -1028,6 +1035,11 @@ int journal_dirty_data(handle_t *handle,
-                               sync_dirty_buffer(bh);
-                               jbd_lock_bh_state(bh);
-                               spin_lock(&journal->j_list_lock);
-+                              /* Since we dropped the lock... */
-+                              if (!buffer_mapped(bh)) {
-+                                      JBUFFER_TRACE(jh, "buffer got unmapped");
-+                                      goto no_journal;
-+                              }
-                               /* The buffer may become locked again at any
-                                  time if it is redirtied */
-                       }
-@@ -1823,6 +1835,7 @@ static int journal_unmap_buffer(journal_
-                       }
-               }
-       } else if (transaction == journal->j_committing_transaction) {
-+              JBUFFER_TRACE(jh, "on committing transaction");
-               if (jh->b_jlist == BJ_Locked) {
-                       /*
-                        * The buffer is on the committing transaction's locked
-@@ -1837,7 +1850,6 @@ static int journal_unmap_buffer(journal_
-                * can remove it's next_transaction pointer from the
-                * running transaction if that is set, but nothing
-                * else. */
--              JBUFFER_TRACE(jh, "on committing transaction");
-               set_buffer_freed(bh);
-               if (jh->b_next_transaction) {
-                       J_ASSERT(jh->b_next_transaction ==
-@@ -1857,6 +1869,7 @@ static int journal_unmap_buffer(journal_
-                * i_size already for this truncate so recovery will not
-                * expose the disk blocks we are discarding here.) */
-               J_ASSERT_JH(jh, transaction == journal->j_running_transaction);
-+              JBUFFER_TRACE(jh, "on running transaction");
-               may_free = __dispose_buffer(jh, transaction);
-       }
- 
-